Assess whether the control plane actually controls production traffic (3ad51d)

SITUATION Reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality arrived with a batch job still calling a retired endpoint for decision-audit designer. That is a AI Governance Layer Audit and Vendor Terms decision on the control plane actually in a hospital committee that never records dissent.

DECISION Decision-audit designer in a hospital committee that never records dissent must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after a batch job still calling a retired endpoint.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. A batch job still calling a retired endpoint is noise around an already-controlled Audit and Vendor Terms process in a hospital committee that never records dissent, given reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality. 2. A batch job still calling a retired endpoint is the event in reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality that forces Policy or governance breach for decision-audit designer under AI Governance Layer. 3. Reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality shows a one-file miss after a batch job still calling a retired endpoint, not a Audit and Vendor Terms program failure. 4. Reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality cannot decide the control plane actually yet after a batch job still calling a retired endpoint; hold is the only AI Governance Layer close a hospital committee that never records dissent can defend.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Map the control-plane score in reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality to the policy gate decision-audit designer can enforce. 2. Name the override that would let the control plane actually proceed without a silent bypass. 3. Test whether a batch job still calling a retired endpoint changed routing, logging, or human-in-the-loop on the live agent path. 4. For this AI Governance Layer Audit and Vendor Terms file, read reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality against a batch job still calling a retired endpoint and write the one fact that would move the control plane actually for decision-audit designer.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance Layer / Audit and Vendor Terms packet (reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality after a batch job still calling a retired endpoint). Lead with the AI Governance Layer option reconciliation policy when two models split on materiality can support after a batch job still calling a retired endpoint, then the two facts that force it, then the Monday action for decision-audit designer in a hospital committee that never records dissent.